| |
|
|
The Supernatural
Supernatural literally means transcending
the natural. Generally, it involves the belief in conscious
forces that cannot ordinarily be perceived except through
their effects. Sometimes it is used to characterize or
explain events that people consider extraordinary (see also
preternatural or
paranormal).
A concept of the supernatural is generally identified
with
religion, although there is much debate as to whether a
conception of the supernatural is necessary for religion
(see
The nature of God in Western theology and
Anthropology of religion). Generally, people contrast
the supernatural with the
natural and some believe that these two concepts are
compatible or complementary (in other words, religion and
science fulfill different but equally valid functions),
while others believe that they are incompatible and in
competition.
Nevertheless, many claims of supernatural phenomena often
conflict directly and fundamentally with current scientific
understanding, as well as with the
dogma of the scientific perspective.
There have been many attempts to verify claims of
supernatural phenomena scientifically. Many have failed,
while others have claimed to show startling and unusual
results. Most scientists claim that these phenomena are best
classified as
pseudoscience, and that they appear to be manifestations
of a natural, explainable nature that are misinterpreted.
Most religious people claim that these phenomena, being
essentially "unnatural," are not appropriate for scientific
study (see also
William James, The Variety of Religious Experience).
The supernatural is also a topic in various genres of
fiction, such as fantasy and horror. Some examples of
supernatural phenomena are
miracles,
ghosts;
psychic abilities like
telekinesis and
telepathy are better classified as
paranormal than supernatural.
The following arguments are frequently cited against the
existence of supernatural events:
- Much of what we call
science today was once believed to be supernatural.
The control of electricity, the manufacture of steel,
radio waves, all were once thought to be beyond the
bounds of
nature, and therefore supernatural, by conventional
scientists. As such, what is believed to be
supernatural today may be completely explained
tomorrow.
- In accord with the
scientific method, science cannot hope to verify or
disprove unilaterally all phenomena deemed supernatural,
as those things that fall outside the bounds of what we
know are simply unknown at this time. Theoretically,
supernatural phenomena could be proved by the scientific
method, and this has been attempted several times. After
this happens, they would not be classified as
'supernatural' anymore.
- Supernatural events cannot or are unlikely to occur
(cf.
Occam's Razor), and some, if not all, theological
claims made by religions are unprovable.
- Those who do not rely upon dogmatic authority will
find no impartial argument for accepting the dogma that
the Bible (or any other religious scripture or
institution) is infallible, or historically accurate and
flawless. The absence of independent evidence confirming
some of the biblical narratives has caused many scholars
to question the accuracy or even the historicity of
these accounts (see
The Bible and history). In this view, the Bible is
seen as a work written by human beings, and developed in
a given historical and social context over a long period
of time. This word was influenced by a process of
deliberate or unconscious mysticism, in which both
Biblical writers, and later readers, attributed natural
events to the will of
God.
- Because the truth of supernatural claims cannot be
objectively tested, disputes about them often lead to
schism,
persecution, and
war. The
philosopher
Bertrand Russell pointed this out in his essay "An
outline of Intellectual Rubbish":
-
- The most savage controversies are those about
matters as to which there is no good evidence either
way. Persecution is used in theology, not in
arithmetic, because in arithmetic there is
knowledge, but in theology there is only opinion. So
whenever you find yourself getting angry about a
difference of opinion, be on your guard; you will
probably find, on examination, that your belief is
going beyond what the evidence warrants.
- Examples:
- The
Great Schisms among Christians were the
culmination of centuries of disagreement concerning
the powers of the
Pope to decide doctrine. No objective standard
for resolving these differences has been agreed
upon, then or since. It may be argued, then, that
only the abandonment of the competing supernatural
claims can possibly lead to the resolution of
differences.
- The
Thirty Years War was justified as a defense of
inviolable privileges granted by God to the
Roman Catholic Church and the Catholic Emperor,
over against the Protestant claims of God's grant of
the rights of nations and of self-government
according to the Bible.
- For centuries, Christians angered and frustrated
by the refusal of
Jews to acknowledge
Jesus as the
Messiah have considered the Jews to be
especially guilty of the
crucifixion of Christ, cursed and deserving of
suffering (see
deicide). Other folk-religious beliefs about
alliances between the Jews and Satan, and similar
terrifying
conspiracy theories, have fueled hatred and
cruelty toward the Jewish people, and have produced
a special indifference to Jewish suffering.
- Where science is able to address issues in dispute,
to correct errors of fact, or to call into question
claims of authority grounded in history, it has at times
been able to soften antagonisms based on competing
supernatural claims. This is because in issues of
observable fact the truth of opposing claims can, at
least in principle, be objectively tested, eliminating
the temptation toward violence to resolve a difference
of views and silence dissent.
- Truth as suggested by naturalistic science may
arguably provide greater freedom of opinion beyond those
issues that can be decided by science, but science
itself does not claim to be able to resolve disputes of
authority, or of rights or standards of morality, unless
these are issues of testable fact. Otherwise, (for
example) the politics and morality of a scientist are as
subjective or as reliant upon assumptions about the
supernatural as those of anyone else -- and of course,
individuals may decide to remain either passively
agnostic about every issue that cannot be tested or
actively hostile to claims of authority that cannot be
scientifically justified.
- Naturalistic science may arguably provide promise of
greater agreement of thought and culture than
supernaturalism has. Science is far more widely accepted
than any particular form of supernaturalism: men and
women of all races, cultures, and religions practice
science or use the technology inspired by it, but they
do not all accept
naturalism as a philosophy.
Following are some common counter arguments to the above.
- By its own definition, science is incapable of
examining or testing for the existence of the
supernatural. Science concerns itself with what can be
measured and seen through normal human observation,
often with the help of instruments. If supernatural
phenomena or beings were to exist, scientific methods
would not detect them consistently. So the lack of
scientific evidence does not matter.
- Applying Occam's Razor is useful when looking for an
explanation of specific events, but the likelihood of a
natural or supernatural cause is determined largely by
whether a person believes in the supernatural in the
first place. Using this argument against the existence
of the supernatural is circular. Theological claims
generally do not claim or attempt to be scientifically
provable.
- Much of modern biblical scholarship is based on the
assumption that the supernatural does not exist, or that
God is far less involved in the world than commonly
supposed (deism).
This assumption biases their results just as much as the
religious believers' assumption that God does exist and
interacts with the world biases the results of their
research. However, we should note that members of the
supernaturalist Jewish community do not accept the
supernatural claims made by that section of the Bible
known as the
New Testament, just as members of the Christian
community do not accept the supernatural claims made by
the
Koran, the sacred book of members of the
Islamic community. Nevertheless, the
scholar of religion[?]
John Drane[?] observes vis-ŕ-vis a
rigidly hegemonic[?] naturalistic understanding of
the nature of 'truth' and 'reality:'
-
- Not unrelated to this is a more general
philosophical scepticism towards any document
whether ancient or modern, that appears to give
credence to the possibility of the occurrence of
unique, or apparently miraculous happenings.
Academic biblical study still generally operates
within a mechanistic world-view, according to which
the universe is understood as a closed system,
operating according to rigidly structured 'laws of
nature' which are entirely predictable and never
deviate. By definition, therefore, the unpredictable
cannot happen, and on this view it is inevitable
that the gospels should be seen as something other
than history, for they do contain accounts of a
number of unique happenings which appear to violate
the 'laws of nature' as set out by Newtonian
science. Physics, of course, no longer operates on
that paradigm, and the work of more recent theorists
has led to the emergence of a far more flexible
understanding of what might be possible within the
physical universe. Philosophers and theologians
frequently have a lot to say about the emergence of
so-called postmodernity, but on the whole they have
yet to accept its implications, not least because it
would put their own work in a wider context, as just
one possible way among many others of understanding
the nature of reality.
- Another advantage of supernaturality vis-ŕ-vis
scientific
naturalism is that its more flexible and nuanced
understanding of the role of evidence frees it up to
promote
polyvalent[?]
diversity in terms of
epistemology. For example, members of the
cosmology,
astronomical, and
biological communities within the naturalistic
hegemony of western science accept a rigid general
overall
consensus that the
earth and
universe are many millions of years old in terms of
age. Among members of the
Christianity
theological communities, however, there is a far
wider range in terms of epistemological positioning,
ranging from those members of theological communities
who accept a literal interpretation of
Genesis as
normative[?] and perceive the earth and universe as
6000 years old in terms of age to those members of
theological communities who accept as normative the
results of western hegemonic science and perceive the
earth and universe as many millions of years old in
terms of age. There is similar epistemological diversity
among members of the Christian theological communities
vis-ŕ-vis
evolution, and some
scholar of religion[?] express the hope that the
more nuanced and sophisticated range of
belief-positioning available in terms of supernaturality
may influence western hegemonic science. As the
John Drane[?] again observes vis-ŕ-vis the
centrally-positioned role of w.h.s. in perpetuating
normative ideologies of racism and xenophobia:
-
- To say that unique events can never happen, or
that the supernatural does not exist, when most
people of most ethnic groups at most points in
history have claimed otherwise, is merely to
perpetuate the intellectual arrogance of previous
generations of Western thinkers, and far from
providing an answer to the questions raised by
history it merely begs larger and more important
questions about the nature of Western intellectual
culture.
The
neologism supernaturalize,
meaning "to make supernatural", is sometimes used to
describe the process of ascribing supernatural causes to
natural events. This process may also be referred to as
mythification or spiritualization.
Because the assumption of the skeptical reader is that
supernatural events cannot or are unlikely to occur, their
description is seen as the result of a process of deliberate
or unconscious mysticism, thus, "supernaturalization".
-
- Until there was any proper understanding of the
causative factors in disease and the actual disease
processes themselves, there was a tendency to see
sickness as a result of divine visitations and
punishment for wrongdoing. (Oxford Companion to
the Bible (1992), entry for "Medicine and the
Bible")
Many modern
skeptical readers of the
Bible hold that its authors gradually reinterpreted
historical and natural events as miraculous or supernatural.
The article on
The supernatural in monotheistic religions thus concerns
itself with the junction between monotheistic religions,
such as
Judaism,
Christianity and
Islam, and the supernatural.
|
|
